New Post
Search
Help[Facts] Re: name update + family trees
in reply to a message by Mike C
Thanks ... the tree is a very useful summary!!!
Does a less well job in Arabic (Salim and Salman are not seen as related, for example, even though they have the same root, cf. Yahweh does link to Jonathan even though it is only related to a part of the root of the latter).
But I am confused about all this: all the Jo- names seem to be linked into a tree of Yahweh, but not all the -el names. Are these different kinds of connections? (i.e. is Jonathan and John more closely related than Michael and Nathaniel, either structurally or conceptually?)
Also, though it does link the obvious Quranic and Biblical connections (Isa is in the obvious place), it does not go so far as proto-semitic in trying to link the ilah of Allah to the eloah series or to the lofty, climbing Ali- series of names, either in Hebrew or in Arabic. That is less of a problem, because the etymological analysis does need to stop somewhere; and, may be an onomastics board is not a good place to debate the Nostratic hypothesis :-) But, for people like me who do not know the semitic languages, it would have helped to draw out the Arabic-Hebrew connections.
Does a less well job in Arabic (Salim and Salman are not seen as related, for example, even though they have the same root, cf. Yahweh does link to Jonathan even though it is only related to a part of the root of the latter).
But I am confused about all this: all the Jo- names seem to be linked into a tree of Yahweh, but not all the -el names. Are these different kinds of connections? (i.e. is Jonathan and John more closely related than Michael and Nathaniel, either structurally or conceptually?)
Also, though it does link the obvious Quranic and Biblical connections (Isa is in the obvious place), it does not go so far as proto-semitic in trying to link the ilah of Allah to the eloah series or to the lofty, climbing Ali- series of names, either in Hebrew or in Arabic. That is less of a problem, because the etymological analysis does need to stop somewhere; and, may be an onomastics board is not a good place to debate the Nostratic hypothesis :-) But, for people like me who do not know the semitic languages, it would have helped to draw out the Arabic-Hebrew connections.
1